RuneQuest Deluxe

I've looked at the Mongoose stuff, but won't be buying it, because of the title page in the rule book:

Author & Game Design: Matthew Sprange :(

Matthew who?

Some guy who fiddles around the edges of one of the oldest frp's in the business is not the Game Designer. That was Steve Perrin, with Ray Turney. Mr Perrin is not mentioned anywhere, even though much of the system remains unchanged from first edition. This stinks.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

GrumpyOldMan said:
I've looked at the Mongoose stuff, but won't be buying it, because of the title page in the rule book:

Author & Game Design: Matthew Sprange :(

Matthew who?

Some guy who fiddles around the edges of one of the oldest frp's in the business is not the Game Designer. That was Steve Perrin, with Ray Turney. Mr Perrin is not mentioned anywhere, even though much of the system remains unchanged from first edition. This stinks.

And Greg Stafford.

Man - that's a cold move. The original creators should be acknowledged in the book.
 

northrundicandus said:
And Greg Stafford.

Man - that's a cold move. The original creators should be acknowledged in the book.

My understanding of the Perrin/Stafford collaboration is that Mr Stafford was responsible for Glorantha and Messrs Perrin & Turney for the original rules, but yes Greg Stafford is worthy of a mention too. Certainly, the latest RuneQuest is closer to the original than the current DnD is to it's predecessors.
 

GrumpyOldMan said:
My understanding of the Perrin/Stafford collaboration is that Mr Stafford was responsible for Glorantha and Messrs Perrin & Turney for the original rules, but yes Greg Stafford is worthy of a mention too. Certainly, the latest RuneQuest is closer to the original than the current DnD is to it's predecessors.

There was a big dust up on the Mongoose forums and I'm not 100% sure of how the following ties together (the original thread was removed because it got nasty). The following is what I remember:

1) Steve Perrin was a playtester
2) There was some conflict about some suggestions Steve made.
3) Steve quit playtesting about this time.
4) Mongoose sent him papers to have his name included, but they never got them back.
5) Greg Stafford didn't press to have his name included (or his own). [This comment was along the lines of "Greg was involved in the negotiations and the issue of crediting Steve Perrin didn't come up]
6) Steve was upset about his name not being included, but things seem fine now (a search of the RPG.net forums can probably return these comments).

These "facts" were all brought out at some time by the involved parties. I don't know there was any connection necessarily. For example, Steve may have just stopped playtseting because he got busy. I don't remember if he commented specifically.

Speculations I have read from those who were discussing the missing pos:

1) Mongoose's position is they wrote the rules and those credited are the ones who are responsible for the game. References were made to the "rules can't be copyrighted" argument that has been discussed here lately (please don't drag this up again, I just bring it in for context).
2) Mongoose may be worried about legal issues from crediting him. Steve was the primary person responsible for the RQ rules which formed the basis of "Basic Roleplaying" and crediting him may open some legal complications.

I remember someone from Mongoose stating that Matthew Sprange was credited because he wrote the rules, but other than that I don't have any references to comments stating the above. Searching the RPG.net forums might find better references.

Steve's final word on the issue was posted on the Glorantha Digest:
Speaking of Mongoose, for those of you who have not been following the
discussion on RPGNet, Matthew and I have come to an agreement on paying me
for the work I put in and my invoice has been submitted. I also gave him
what I thought would be proper accreditation for the original concepts of
the rules, but have no idea if he will use it.

So that is settling fairly peacefully.

If any of you have not seen what I did for the original magic rules concept,
let me know privately and I'll send you a copy. Looking at it now, about a
year after I first submitted it, I can see a lot that needed to change (not
necessarily to what Mongoose ended up using) but I'm not getting paid to
change it, so you'll have to take it as submitted.
 
Last edited:

grodog said:
How's the new RQ edition compare to RQ2?

I feel it does well on fluff (there is some excellent god learners and karoli (sp?) sourcebooks out), but I feel it does poorely on crunch.

For my money RQ2 is the epitome of game design, and really works well on every levels. I think the mongoose RQ complicates some elements of skills unnecessarily, and goes completely pants when it has people of vastly disparate skill levels (e.g. I've got 120%, you've got 60%. In RQ2 I'd expect to hammer you. In Mongoose RQ my odds of hitting you actually decrease appreciably! I don't know whether they have errated it now, but their original rules did the opposite (mathematically) to what you would reasonably expect!

RQ2 for the win!
 





I'm quite happy with this news as I found the MRQ book too thin. Now if they can make it read better I'd be happy - it's a lifeless read reading the core rules.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top